Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday ordered a floor test in the Uttarakhand Assembly on 31 March to resolve the political crisis and determine which party has majority in the House.
News reports also said that all MLAs will take part in the floor test, including the nine disqualified MLAs who will be allowed to participate during the proceedings of the Assembly only during the floor test.
The court also appointed its Registrar to be an observer during the floor test.
Reports further said that the result of the floor test will not be revealed immediately. The result will be enclosed in a sealed envelope by the Speaker and sent to the court.
Directions have also been given to the Uttarakhand DGP to ensure the floor test takes place in a peaceful way.
Addressing reporters after the court’s order, Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, “The matter was argued extensively. The high court has passed an order which, according to us, accepts the point that despite President’s Rule, there is enough scope for judicial review to allow floor test. The floor test was asked on the basis of past precedents of the Supreme Court.”
He also said that the charges against Rawat do not justify President’s rule. “Mere horse trading allegations will not justify President’s Rule. The court has implemented what the Governor had thrice said and what the Chief Minister agreed to twice.
“The court has allowed, only for purposed of counting, voting by disqualified and non-disqualified MLAs. Votes of disqualified MLAs will ke kept separately for identification, subject to the outcome,” he said.
Congress on Monday had legally challenged the imposition of President’s Rule in Uttarakhand as it sparred with BJP, accusing the Centre of toppling its government when the Governor had given time to the Chief Minister to prove his majority in the Assembly.
The dislodged Chief Minister had moved the Uttarakhand High Court in Nainital, questioning the Centre’s decision bringing the hill state under President’s Rule.
Rawat’s petition had come up before the single bench of Justice UC Dhyani, who after hearing both sides, had said the matter would be taken up again on Tuesday. It was filed on Rawat’s behalf by senior Supreme Court counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi.
Singhvi had contended that circumstances were not suitable for invoking Article 356 of the Constitution under which the government was sacked and the Assembly kept under suspended animation.
@ AGENCY REPORT.
